Can Protest Work Better? How to Coexist

In just a few days, we will find out from our panelists and from YOU (in the People's Chioce Award category) what ideas may work the best to encourge change while maintaining peace in a community, learning from the past peace activists. Throughout the forum, participants are encouraged to pose questions to their peers to challenge each other's point of view.

Today we would like to share with you a writing from Aya Samson Desie, one of the Top Finishers in the Coexistence: Case Study on Peace & Change Buddies Without Borders Online Forum.

Aya Samson Desie, of Ethiopian descent, is now a 10th grade student in International School of Kigali, Rwanda. Below is an excerpt of her answer to this question: Should violent protests be shut down or can they be more peaceful if people are taught the difference between the two? 

"Given....how nonviolent protests can quickly spiral into nonsensical riots, I highly doubt that most cases of this occurring are a result of ignorance and misunderstandings of what it means to peacefully protest. Due to the idea that it may simply be people seeking personal gain under the guise of protest, I am inclined to believe that avoiding violent protests would require a multifaceted approach addressing the root cause of the issue, why people are protesting, and why they are turning to violence.

While many may see this as pointless as violent protesters should be held accountable, and hearing them out may be seen as permitting violence, it is important to recognize that violent protests often start out fine and only devolve after some sort of catalyst (Arntsen). Thus, meeting protesters before they turn violent is one of the solutions to avoiding violent protests.

For example, minorities often turn to violence when they feel as if there is no other choice (Arntsen). The West Papuans of Indonesia turned to violence over protests against the racism they endured constantly as they were both met with violence when protesting non-violently and already had decades' worth of resentment caused by racist abuse built up to fuel their violence (Wangge). The solution there would've been to avoid meeting their protest with violence and attempt to address their pleas for an equitable society and uphold principles against rioting in the discussion. 

In more immediate cases, avoiding violence would require protests/protesters to be carefully monitored, keeping an eye out for violence and responding appropriately if necessary.  While many may argue that individuals have the right to protest as outlined by the right to freedom of assembly, and thus watching protests in case they turn violent is unwarranted and unjust, the action is simply a precaution ensuring the safety of both the protesters, their cause (many a cause have had their reputations and thus likelihoods to succeed tarnished by violent protest), and innocent bystanders (Arntsen).

Other practical solutions include emphasizing a flow of communication between protesters and police, establishing clear boundaries, and focusing on effective police management as well as focusing on the danger zone of 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 hours after the start of a protest, during which time violence usually occurs (Nassauer).

... What do you consider the difference between a peaceful protest and a non-violent protest? Is there such a thing? In the respect of asking a relevant question, however: Are certain movements naturally more predisposed to inspiring violent protest than others? If so, should these ideologies be watched and would it be fair to limit their spread?

You are invited to speak up in our global community. The application for the next forum is open. Join us!